Recently
I stated that unless “we” stand behind the person who is most
oppressed, “we” will not gain the genuine solidarity needed. This is
because the more oppressed person needs to know that when the more
privileged person gets what s/he needs, that s/he will continue to stand
behind their needs rather than drop them. The person who is most
oppressed needs to understand that their needs will not be abandoned.
While I think this is true, there is another aspect of genuine
solidarity that requires fleshing out.

Canada is a socially
stratified country. I think we can all agree on this. In my mind I
visualize this stratification as a vertical continuum where people are
located at different positions based on their ability to access
services, and thus their ability to live the good life. While some
people are more privileged, others are less so, and this privilege is
reflected in terms of their location on the continuum.

For the
most part, White able-bodied heterosexual women are situated closer to
the top of this continuum of social stratification. This stands to
reason, as most of the structures, institutions, laws, and policies in
this country have been invented, constructed, and managed by White
able-bodied heterosexual men. Black women, Hispanic women, Asian women,
Queer women, Indigenous women, Transgendered women, and Women with
Disabilities are then situated at different locations along this
vertical continuum. In my thinking process − which I am not claiming is
the ultimate truth − I always place Black women, Indigenous women, and
Women with Disabilities close to the bottom. Of course I know there are
limitations and thus exceptions to this general thinking in
understanding this placement in that there are poor White women, and for
that matter, financially well-off Indigenous women in Canada.
Regardless, to some degree this general understanding is a useful
cognitive structure to think through issues such as how do women begin
to engage in allyship across our differences and in a way that we are
more effective in our need for structural change.

In illustrating
what I mean by privilege, I define it as occurring when all things are
equal between a poor Indigenous woman and a poor White woman yet the
structures, institutions, laws, and policies one needs to navigate to
survive are White. Today this is commonly referred to as “White
privilege” and people such as Peggy McIntosh, whose interest is
inclusive curriculum, Tim Wise, an anti-racist educator, and comedian
Louis C. K., whose script addresses White privilege all talk about this
issue. I too have offered a satirical diatribe on the topic after I
encountered its denial. My goal here in mentioning “White privilege” is
not to offend people, but rather establish a launching pad to then
begin to think and talk about conceptually complex issues. In offering
this discussion of privilege it is important that I point out that when a
woman is both Indigenous and has a disability, for example, her
experience of structural oppression also includes interactional effects
where, as a result, the effects of her lived experience with structural
oppressions are greater than the sum of its parts.

I rely on this
understanding of social stratification, and define privilege in this way
to illustrate my point about the need for women who are more privileged
in terms of the continuum of social stratification to engage in
concrete, on-the-ground equity practices, equity practices that serve
women who are more oppressed. Equity practices require us to first
understand equity, and second to engage in remedial equity practices
that will lead to a better life for people more oppressed.

Thinking
through this model of social stratification as I do, and as an
Indigenous woman with a disability, I am always struck by how it is that
oftentimes some women, of course not all, are unable to really
understand the meaning of equity versus equality. As a matter of fact,
sometimes I actually encounter denial by some people who argue that
women who are more oppressed require help. Some go as far as offer the
excuse that Indigenous women are not getting involved enough, and that
Indigenous women are not stepping up and sitting on planning
committees. Yet, these same people claim to be social justice advocates
interested in real change. At times I am inclined to think that this
denial is a form of lateral violence.

Let’s face it, in order for
real change to occur, women need to form alliances across our
differences. Needed is a genuine theory of solidarity. The solidarity
theory I propose is simple: If equality is desired, equity measures are
required; we need to follow the turtle. We need to follow the most
oppressed in the movement forward.

Moving from this more genuine
theory of solidarity, rather than false solidarity models and theories,
in situations where the women who are more oppressed are not present in
physical body, it is the responsibility of more privileged women to
reach out and accommodate them in whatever way they can. More
privileged women need to understand that more oppressed women may not be
represented in their planning committee for very real concrete reasons
such as their need to focus on finding food for their family, issues of
personal safety, or in the case of a person with a disability, a lack of
funds to take a taxi. Understanding this and accommodating the needs
of these women represents equity in practice.

The bottom line is
White women who do gain inroads in a White patriarchal society will do
so at the expense of the women who are most oppressed. This is hardly
an advance. Freedom must not come off the backs of those more
oppressed. By relying on a genuine theory of solidarity with its
inherent equity practices and placing the needs of those more oppressed −
the metaphoric turtle − at the forefront of your efforts where you
stand behind the women who are more oppressed, such as the One Billion
Rising campaign, community Persons Day Breakfasts, International Women’s
Day events, and inviting women speakers of colour and of different
dis/abilities into your institutions to talk about women’s oppression,
we engage in a process of genuine solidarity.

It is only through
concrete equity practices that all people will gain emancipation. To
offer the argument “we are all equal,” and the excuse “to stand behind
is offensive,” is a sure indication that you do not understand equity in
practice. Succinctly, if equality is desired, equity measures are
required. Be selfish and stand behind me, my sisters, and their babies
as it will assure your own emancipation. The turtle must be the leader
for social justice to prevail.
_______________________________________

Lynn
Gehl−Gii-Zhigaate-Mnidoo-Kwe, Ph.D., is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe
from the Ottawa River Valley. She has a section 15 Charter challenge
regarding the continued sex discrimination in The Indian Act,
she is an outspoken critic of the Ontario Algonquin land claims and
self-government process, and she recently published a book titled Anishinaabeg Stories: Featuring Petroglyphs, Petrographs, and Wampum Belts.
Lynn also blogs and has over 70 community based and academic journal
publications. In her spare time, she carves nickel-sized turtles. You
can reach her at lynngehl@gmail.com and see more of her work at www.lynngehl.com.